Under Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution (known as the "MacArthur Article), Japan forfeited their right to any offensive military capability. Although allowed to possess a small (but capable) defense force, Japan swore away any offensive military power under the pressure of the victorious allied powers. Throughout the Cold War, the US personally oversaw all strategic defense matters involving Japan, establishing several permanent bases many of which are still there. With the Cold War long over and with the US facing mounting economic, political, and military difficulties elsewhere in the world and at home, the status quo with regards to Japan is becoming untenable. With the rise of the staunchly conservative Shinzo Abe, the drive for Japanese remilitarization is rapidly gaining ground. Abe ran on a platform of Japanese nationalism and only increased the volume of this message over the recent dispute between Japan and her age-old nemesis, China, over ownership of the Senkaku Islands. China's recent meteoric rise in the Far East has left Japan extremely ill-at-ease and Abe's government wasted no time aggressively defending Japanese national sovereignty over these tiny islands in the East China Sea - all the while placing the US in an extremely awkward situation, especially since a proxy conflict with China is the last thing anyone in Washington wants to face. US officials have been strangely quiet over the issue of Japanese re-armament, leaving one to wonder if that is perhaps Washington's ticket out of an terribly costly (in both financial and political terms) arrangement that isn't even really doing much for us anymore. The Chinese have effectively muscled us out of the Far East diplomatically and economically. Militarily, I can tell you that they possess hardware and strategies that would make any showdown in the Pacific theater between us extremely costly for the US. Also, our presence in Japan continues to draw unwanted attention from anti-American elements in Japanese society and from international pressure. Perhaps allowing Japan to strike down Article 9 and once again assume responsibility (and the bill) for their own defense is not seen as such a bad thing for the US - giving us an ability to quietly decrease our presence in Japan without losing the ability to challenge China for the Far East. Only time will tell.

At last, a bit of good news from Syria (if anything in that hellish situation can even be called "good"). With the obscene amount of horrific violence and abuse committed by the so-called Syrian "freedom fighters," this should come as no surprise to anyone. Regardless of his allegiances to Iran, the Assad regime was one of the more stable in the region - something the Syrian people no doubt greatly appreciated as they watched countries like Iraq descend into unspeakable instability at the hands of the US and NATO. Now, the war is being brought to their country, which is being systematically destroyed by imported Jihadis, courtesy of Washington and their endless nation-building schemes. It was only a matter of time before actual Syrians became disillusioned with being endlessly manipulated by NATO puppet masters and returned to a stability they knew before. What impact this will have on the proxy conflict as a whole, though, is left to be seen.

Putin Calls For An End To The Persecutions of Christians Around the World:

Yet another example of how far Putin is willing to go in order to challenge the US-led global order. Who would ever thought they would see a former Lieutenant Colonel with the KGB call for global action to stop the persecution of Christian minorities around the world?! But it goes to show what Putin is willing to do in the eyes of the international community to upset the secularist progressive agenda of the current global order. It also draws attention to an extremely uncomfortable fact of recent US foreign policy that has yet to be acknowledged by Americans - the tacit destruction of local Christianity by US intervention. It happened in Bosnia, where we took the side of Croatian Muslims (many of whom would later be revealed to possess Jihadist terrorist connections) over Serbian Christians. It happened in Iraq, where our "liberation" would initiate a mass exodus of the native Chaldean Christians who had formerly been protected from Islamic persecution under the anti-extremist Saddam regime. Egypt, Libya, and now Syria (once home to some of the oldest Christian communities in history) all suffer the same fate. Even our unrelenting support of the secular Zionist regime in Israel blithely overlooks the fact that Palestinian Christians - the descendants of the first Christian converts from the time of the Apostles - are treated with utter contempt by Tel Aviv and endure the degrading status of second-class citizens. While it can be assured that Putin's recent outcry over this issue is more politically motivated, his courage in bringing international attention to it should be admired. It certainly seems that wherever US intervention occurs, Christianity suffers - it just took a savvy old veteran of the Cold War to call us out on it.

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

You all knew it was only a matter of time before you heard something like this from me.

If there is one victim of groundless and irrational hatred on the part of Modernity, it would be the Medieval era. You hear it/read it/see it everywhere - how the "Dark Ages" was nothing but a time of unrestrained tyranny, filth, superstition, intolerance, misogyny, and ignorance. Hell, even the word "medieval" has become synonymous with images of disease-ridden peasants being hounded by fat corrupt clerics and nobles into terrorizing women, free-thinkers, and Jews - before they all fall dead of failing to wash their hands. Thank Almighty Reason that the Enlightenment happened! What I find simultaneously hilarious and infuriating (seriously, I twitch in a homicidal manner when listening to "enlightened moderns" engage in medieval-bashing) about this scenario is that the very civilization they are tearing into is also where half of what they take for granted as "modern" came from in the first place. Seriously. Keep making yourself feel good about your moral relativism and your secularism by flinging ideological mudpies at the very men and women that without whom, our own civilization would have never even gotten off the ground. In the following, I intend to take on each overused trope that most (undeservedly) self-righteous Moderns continue to tack onto the incredible monument that is Western Medieval civilization and, at the same time, show why our own criminally overrated civilization has utterly failed in comparison.

Before I get started, yes, I am totally aware that there have been a few other pieces written on this subject (hell, even Cracked.com made an attempt). However, all the ones I've read still fall short of the mark - mostly for one reason that I will cover later. So, in other words, I am fully aware that I'm not the first person to write about this, but mine will be better than them - deal with it.

"Medievals were ignorant"
Generally, this is the most common accusation thrown at the Middle Ages, although it often takes a myriad of different forms. There's the "because they were all a bunch of superstitious church-goers" line, the "they were afraid of anything new or different" line, the "they just wanted an excuse to hate women/Jews/gays/pagans/someotherpetfadofmodernity" line. Overall, the general consensus demands that we all believe that, magically, the human intellect took a collective nose-dive into the allegorical basement of a special-needs children's hospice the minute the last Roman Eagle came down and humanity was left with no other institution but *spit*gag* the Church to take charge of civilization. However, let's look at the actual facts.
English Common Law, the University System, the Scientific Method, the Golden Mean, Gothic Architecture, Banking systems (NOT started by "persecuted Jews," but actually by *shocker* the Crusading military orders) ........ ever heard of any of these? That's right, they were given to us courtesy of the time of "filth and ignorance." Go look them up - I've got time. Also, how about art and culture? First off, to all the Classicists out there, the only reason Homer, Plato, Virgil, and Cicero saw the light of day again after the last Western Emperor gracefully ditched the purple to keep from being flayed alive was because Christian monks set about preserving every scrap of the old knowledge, art, and culture they could lay their hands on. They weren't able to get it all, but what they did get they copied and handed down - that's right, copied ... by hand. Give that some thought the next time you brag to someone about your 45-page "masterpiece" you did at the last minute in order to graduate from college. Oh, and the Church didn't just copy this stuff and stash it away - once the new nations gradually civilized themselves (ie. usually involving converting to *gag*choke* Christianity), the Church founded institutions of learning that eventually became so entrenched in Western civilization that the very same system is still alive today. Furthermore, learning in the Medieval period wasn't some arbitrary progression of "levels" that everyone slogged through so they could "get a good job" - being a scholar was a life-long calling. Scholar was an actual profession in that time - they were men (and women) whose sole purpose in life was to seek out the Truth and teach what they had found along the way to others, usually for little to no compensation. Many of them were attached to religious orders in order to live, but this association did little to hamper their intellectual pursuits - some of them even made important *BIGshocker* scientific discoveries long before Moderns claim they were made.
In the visual and literary arts, the Medievals were unmatched. The great Gothic cathedrals, arising from the same spiritual revitalization that inspired the Crusades, still stand as some of the greatest artistic and engineering masterpieces mankind has to offer. The illuminated manuscripts - some dating as early as the 700s AD - are unparalleled in their painstaking intricacy and beauty ... not to mention in the skill of their creators. What's even better about these is that they are still around and still just as relevant to men's souls as they were then. Think about that the next time you step inside another cookie-cutter temple of modern consumerism. The Italian Renaissance (1345 - late 16th Century) - a movement Modernity smugly claims as a historical period unto itself - is credited as one of the greatest intellectual and cultural advancements of humanity and it took full flight while both a world war (the Hundred Years War) and the worst pandemic in the history of mankind (the Black Death) simultaneously raged across Europe. Put that in perspective - take a good look at our own "enlightened" society, throw in a world war and an unstoppable plague that wipes out a third of of our population and imagine what kind of "cultural blossoming" would occur despite it. Pretty depressing, isn't it?

"Medievals were filthy"
Somehow (again, must be that anti-Reason magic of "God-lovers"), a civilization that gave us Chartres cathedral, the Summa Theologica, Magna Carta, and the University never knew how to wash their own hands. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you think about it that way. Many Medieval cities still possessed functioning sewage systems left behind by Roman engineers. Others simply reverse engineered effective waste removal grids from Roman era remnants. Some still function to this day. Walk through any major city today and you will find areas of appalling filth - it's just a human thing for some reason. No, they didn't have air-conditioning, electric power, hand-sanitizers, antibiotics, or flushing toilets ....... but then, neither does most of the rest of the world today and humanity as a whole seems to be doing just fine. In fact, there's some substantial (but suppressed) arguments out there that some of our "clean living" may not actually be all that good for us in the long run.
Of course, any discussion on Medieval hygiene always eventually arrives at the Black Death. Something along the lines of "well, if they had only practiced good bathing habits instead of praying and being all religious all the time, that wouldn't have happened." First off, Medievals had excellent personal hygiene - in fact, better than a lot of Americans I know. Second, holding up the Black Death as being the fault of the Medieval man's actions is like saying the KT Extinction Event was somehow egged on by the dinosaurs. It was literally a fluke catastrophe that would have been just as deadly if it struck today as it was in 1347AD. What made it so lethal was the combination of several preceding decades of what is now known as the beginning of the "Little Ice Age" (1350-1850AD) with general malnutrition due to decades of moderately poor harvests. Also, remember, as of 1337AD, there was currently the Medieval equivalent of a world war raging between England and France and their respective allies all across France, the Low Countries, Spain, and Northern Italy, making all those places ripe for disease to spread. Finally, the pathogen that was mostly responsible for the overwhelming death toll wasn't even normal bubonic plague (a disease still alive and well if you talk to anyone from the Mountain States) - it was a pneumonic mutation that could kill (and still can) within days of infection. And, somehow, despite all this, Medieval society still managed to survive, function, and even experience a cultural renewal. Again, apply those same circumstances to our own society - where people lose their effing minds when the power is out for a few days - and quit with the "Black Death" criticism.

"The Middle Ages were ruled by tyrants/bigots/misogynists"
Once again, Modernity's flawless logical theorem that states, "Christianity is bad. Medieval society was Christian. Ergo, Medieval society was ... just ... bad, somehow" strikes again. The Crusades, the Inquisitions, Male domination of society, the "persecuted" Jews ...... it's all mashed up into a smorgasbord of anti-modern, politically incorrect "tales from the crypt" that, I swear, progressives use to scare their 1.5 kids with at night. Oh, and almost all of it is bulls**t.
Ladies first. Ever heard of this weird, quaint little term called "Chivalry?" You know, that thing American women keep saying is dead, right before they immediately fling themselves at the first J Crew-sporting pop-music-video wannabe douchebag that crosses their path? That thing that made men from better generations ago open doors for women, defend women, talk politely to women, place women in lifeboats first, etc.? That all started with the Medievals. Before the Middle Ages, the West still operated by the Greco-Roman mentality, which pretty much viewed women as inferiors to men. It was mostly a benevolent inferiority, but things like property rights, inheritance, and political leadership were out of the question. Then, Greco-Roman society gave way (violently) in the West to Germanic societies in which women often held equal status with men. This fit very nicely into Christian principles (yes - Christianity actually encouraged forms of equality) and the concept of knightly chivalry was born. Medieval history is crammed full of women who distinguished themselves as scholars, artists, theologians, great leaders, and even commanders on the field of battle. Jean le Bel - a knight-turned-cleric who masterfully recorded the early years of the Hundred Years War - had nothing but the highest praise for Countess Joanna de Montfort, who singlehandedly led and defended Brittany against the French crown after her husband's death. Spirited women were celebrated in Medieval society, but they always remained women. A key element of the chivalric code was the exaltation of women as an ideal worthy of men fighting and dying for. Oftentimes, Courtly Romances remained platonic - a knight would fight and potentially give his life for a woman he would never get anything from due to her marriage. Good luck finding that kind of devotion today, all you "liberated" women.

Then comes the interactions between peoples of different faiths and cultures. Even here, the Medievals outshine us. "But what about the *snarl*knashingofteeth* CRUSADES?!!!" Yes, let's look at those real quick. First off, the Crusades were a response (a rather late one, at that) to almost 500 years of non-stop Islamic aggression against the entire Western world. The Byzantine Empire, the Old Rome's last holdout in the East and guardian of the land of Christ's birth, had suffered defeat after defeat at the hands of men sworn to "slay the infidel, wherever they are found." The holy sites were lost and, even worse, fellow Christians were being terrorized and martyred. In our day, the most we might do is post some infomercial for charity and say some prayers before going on with life as usual. In those heady days of red-blooded faith, when the fires of true reform had spread from Cluny and a pope had triumphed over an emperor, men of war would pick up swords solely for the sake of an ideal and would carry the Cross back to Jerusalem. They would then hold it for just shy of 200 years - establishing a society of religious freedom and tolerance not seen in the Levant since then. Even Muslim writers from the times attest to this. The Inquisitions? Those happened locally in Spain for only a brief time before they were actually stopped by the Church and don't even remotely (even when combined with the Crusades) come close to the estimated death tolls of modern-day democides ("death by government"). Were there evil men involved with these efforts? Of course, as with anything we fallen humans are involved with. Answer me truthfully - how have we improved on that ... at all? Besides Crusades and heresies, Medieval society could be incredibly cosmopolitan. Jewish persecution was much less frequent than portrayed, and even the few times it did happen, the Church was usuallythe first to step in and stop it. St. Thomas Aquinas regularly read and even met with Jewish and Muslim scholars of his day - he was especially fond of the Semitic Aristotelians whom he referenced quite often in the Summa.
Lastly, if there was one thing Medievals had no time or patience for, it was tyranny. Too often, moderns confuse the autocratic privilege of the Enlightenment-era Old World with the Middle Ages. The two could not be more different. There were no "enlightened despots" cavorting about while peasants and serfs died from neglect. The Medieval ideal of leadership was as harsh and demanding as it was unforgiving. Men would follow leaders who inspired them, those that couldn't typically didn't end well. With social status came incredible responsibilities. Kings and nobles were expected to not only lead armies, but to be the first ones into the fight. Those that didn't, like Philip IV of France or Edward II of England, were universally despised by friend and foe alike. This started at shockingly young ages - Edward "the Black Prince" won his spurs at Crecy at the age of 16; the beloved Henry V of Agincourt-fame won his at the age of 15, commanding his father's right flank and taking a Welsh arrow to the face. In contrast, imagine where we were at 15. Nobles that abused their peasants often met with bloody ends and the concept of rights for all classes was not something new, even if codifying them in a Charter was. The great Aquinas would write a thesis on proper kingship in 1267AD from which many of the central ideas would be shamelessly plagiarized by Enlightenment thinkers. What the Medievals did not have was an idolatrous love affair with all things "democratic." All men were equally fallen and no one class was infallible - certainly not the mob. Each man, woman, and child had a specific role to play, and that role came with duties and responsibilities that only they were expected to fulfill. The individual was not deified and not everyone "could grow up to be an astronaut." At the end of the day, duty - duty for Faith, King, and family - came first for those in the Middle Ages ... and they were strangely comfortable with that.

Why They Were Better
At long last, I come to the point that no other Medieval de-bunking article would cover: why does Modernity continue to misrepresent the Middle Ages? Why do they ignore the enormous abundance of evidence and insist on wrecking the memory of perhaps the West's finest hour? Perhaps I just answered the question. Modernity is founded on the ideals of progressivism - ideals that exalt the fallen individual to a god-like status, that call for total egalitarianism at the expense of true leadership, and that deny any objective truth for the sake of a culture of moral chaos. And look where it's gotten us. We live in a civilization in which instant gratification is king, self-entitlement is the norm, comfort comes before principle, safety comes before heroism, and the Truth is whatever everyone wants it to be. Authority, per the guidelines of the Cult of Democracy, is questioned simply to be questioned - but leaders whose sole quality is appealing to the whims of a mob remain untouched in the highest positions of power. Craftsmanship is nearly extinct and art is simply the self-absorbed fantasy of the artist. Happiness and fulfillment have been delegated to consumer goods - and both are in scant supply. Why would they want us to remember what had been?
For all their flaws (that they honestly owned up to), the Medievals knew how to live, how to love, how to fight, and how to die. Also, he actually believed in what he claimed to. He didn't treat the Faith like a safety blanket solely meant for his own comfort - being a Christian meant certain duties were required of him, duties that could demand of him even his very life. It was a time of men - men who would gladly die for an ideal. It was a time of women - women secure in their authentic femininity and who could command the respect and devotion of even the most hardened of warriors. A time when great works were crafted for God and to help countless future generations seek out His Beauty. A time when great artists fashioned mighty works, and then left them to posterity without even signing their name to them.
I suppose what I admire so much about the Middle Ages was how genuine they were compared to our own times. Whether good or evil, their deeds were genuine. To be a truly great civilization, a certain amount of humility is needed - a humility that reminds you that you cannot solve all problems and right all wrongs, that you are just as flawed and fallen as all the rest, and that, at the End of All Things, there is Another to Whom we must all answer. Some may accuse me of finishing this by romanticizing a single period of history, but, from what I've seen of the Medieval Era, they deserve it far more than we ever will.

Thursday, July 18, 2013

Due to the latent infrequency of my writing style, I have chosen to stay away from any grandiose pieces of opinion for the present and would instead like to establish some less ambitious pieces that I will update on a weekly basis. This will be the first.

Geopolitics - or, even just intimate knowledge of current events beyond our borders - is not our country's strong suit ... not by a long shot. However, such ignorance will not do us any favors. This world of humans that we live in is a like a vast expanse of windswept sand dunes, forever shifting and moving - sometimes in radically unexpected ways. Keeping oneself from being smothered requires constant vigilance. All the great geopoliticians, from Justinian to Von Bismark, intimately understood this vigilance and never ceased to keep themselves constantly informed.
Each story will accompany a brief assesment of mine, however, please don't let that stop you from forming your own. I hold no monopoly on world affairs - I simply tend to have far more knowledge at my disposal. Please feel free to discuss below. I am not sure which day of the week I will publish these, but most likely either Thursdays or Fridays.

Chairman of Joint Chiefs Announces "Consideration of US Military Force" In Syria:

In short, the Washington elite have been following the exact same script that sent us into Iraq in 2003 with the current civil war raging between the loyalist forces of Bashar Assad and the foreign jihadist mercenaries backed by NATO. What is truly unnerving with this entire situation is the careless duplicity the US and NATO have displayed in their desperate zeal to remove the only Shi'ite supporter of Iran in the Levant. Although Assad's Syria has often served as a harbor for various Iranian-backed terrorist groups (a source of constant conflict with Israel), one has to question the wisdom of replacing a relatively stable regime like Assad's with the chaos brought by foreign Sunni jihadist radicals - many of whom were the same men responsible for sending hundreds of young Americans home from Iraq and Afghanistan in flag-draped coffins.
The fact that the US and NATO have been funding and arming Al-Qaeda operatives in Libya and Syria is beyond debate now. So much for the "War on Terror." Also, Washington's adamant desire to oust Assad is woefully oblivious to the larger geopolitical consequences of such an action - namely, a proxy war with Assad's committed allies, Iran and the Russian Federation. The Russians, in particular, have next to no patience left with NATO meddling in the Middle East. Moscow has consistently sought to maintain the secular nationalist Arab regimes and, under the guise of the Washington-crafted "Arab Spring," these regimes have all but been wiped out. An open proxy war with Russia would most likely turn into a ruthless quagmire for any US forces deployed to Syria, especially when one considers Russia's sudden military rejuvenation under the Putin reign. More to follow on this.

Putin Praises Russian Forces For Participation In Largest Military Drill Since End of Cold War:

The resurrection of the Russian Federation under the Putin regime has truly been perhaps the greatest unsung act of political genius in the 21st Century. Prior to Putin's arrival, post-Soviet Russia was a disaster - a cesspool of social decay fueled by drugs and Western consumerism and lorded over by a cabal of corporate gangsters known as "the Oligarchs." Today, Russian power is once again a force to be reckoned with and Moscow, backed by a populace rejuvenated with the old-style nationalism and a military that has regained much of its former strength, has become a strong challenging voice against what it has always perceived as American-led global hegemony. It is a voice Washington can no longer afford to ignore.

By seemingly entering into an alliance of convenience with the budding (and unequivocally anti-American) superpower rising out of China, Russia is now in a strategic position that could offer substantial resistance to post-Cold War NATO hegemony. This is coming to a head in the current situation in Syria. Moscow has always maintained close relations with the more secular Arab regimes - mostly due to the US' traditional alignment with the Zionist state of Israel. What could cause that conflict to escalate rapidly is if the US insists (at Israel's behest) on dismantling the Assad regime and depriving Moscow of her last remaining ally in the Levant (not to mention the only permanent Russian naval port in the Mediterranean). Most policy makers in Washington seem to be oblivious to the advanced state of readiness of Russian military capabilities - and their belligerent posture. On at least three occasions, Russian TU-95 "Bear" strategic bombers have flown into US airspace and simulated attack runs - one in which the aircraft were reported to be carrying tactical nuclear weaponry within 120 miles of Anderson Air Force base in Guam (a story that virtually went unreported in the US media). More immediately threatening is Russia's ability to wage a proxy war against the US should we invade Syria. We may be able to walk in whenever we please, but Putin - in classic KGB fashion - will ensure we pay dearly for however long we stay.

Although the Snowden leaks concerning PRISM and the unconstitutional domestic electronic surveillance by the Federal government against US citizens may seem like more of domestic issue, the geopolitical implications of potential foreign asylum for such a character are enormous. Something many Americans at home are oblivious to is that, for the past several decades, world opinion of the US has been sinking rapidly - especially amongst the developing nations. Our cultural and corporate imperialism, coupled with our haphazard and disingenuous foreign policy, has severely (if not irreparably) tarnished the American global image. As a consequence, many of them have found new friends in the vocally anti-American superpowers of Russia and China. Neither of these powers would, for a second, waste a chance to exploit an opportunity that would help them sell an image of a US hypocrisy to their followers in the Third World. Also, drawing from my own knowledge of Russian intelligence affairs, I can guarantee you that Edward Snowden has already prepared himself to hand over any and all material concerning Federal domestic surveillance. He'd be a fool not to - countries don't offer asylum out of the goodness of their hearts. It will be extremely interesting to see how this drama will proceed. Either way, Moscow will get what it needs from him and the US will find it has even less international credibility than before.

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

I didn't even really know exactly what blogging was until about a week ago when about a half dozen or so of you lot literally begged me to do it. I never really thought that my belligerent (and, at times, mentally unstable) denunciations of all things modern and "progressive" were that well received. It seems I was wrong. Not that I do this for public opinion ... those who really know me can readily attest to my seemingly sociopathic tendency of not giving a damn what anyone thinks of me or my opinions. Just to get off on an honest footing here - I still don't. You can accuse me of a lot of things, but inconsistency isn't one of them. Neither is dishonesty - two traits sadly abundant in our era of "good feelings" ... the "Century of the Self" as one man called it.
What you will generally find here will seem scattered, to say the least. I have several passions - vastly different from each other on the surface. Commentary on current political and social events will ride alongside treatises on strategic theory and Medieval history. However, it is the underlying theme that will connect them all ... as those savvy enough to see it will realize.We live in an age in which a few dreamers arrogantly demand worship from the rest of us of the idol they fashioned themselves - the Idol of Modernity. An Idol that only possesses life inside their own twisted and tragic minds. We live in age in which the vast expanse of millennia of human experience is flippantly dismissed as inferior to a collection of pet political and social causes that are as barren and impotent as those who adhere to them. An age that deifies the Individual, even if that Individual chooses utter ruin for himself and those around him. An age where chivalry, honor, and courage are openly mocked by the weak who (rightly) fear such actions. An age in which morality must give way to personal desires and where the Truth Himself must bow to self-gratification.
In an age such as this, the Christian has only only one duty - to stand.
It was for times such as these that we were made. Imperfect as we all are, our mission remains the same. How can we remain silent and stand by when we swore oaths to a Faith bought for us by the Blood of the First Cause of All Causes and carried along by the blood of countless brothers and sisters who died "in the ranks" for it - to use the words of one who sought (and failed) to crush it. A Faith that withstood two millennia of empires, dark ages, hordes, kings, prophets, heretics, revolutions, wars, nation-states, corruption, secularism, and - perhaps the worst and most pervasive of them all - fallen human nature. Shall we fail Her now? I say no.
Many could accuse me of an inordinate obsession with the past. My only response is that, unlike what you will hear from the loud voices shrieking for "progress," perhaps our past has much to teach us for our present. There was once a time in the happy West when a cause meant more than oneself. A time when heroes were real, and often died knowing their stand would end in defeat. A time when men took up arms and charged into the nightmarish hell of combat for God or for the families they loved and left behind. A time when lines were held to the last man and the dead bore smiles on their cold faces. A time when a soldier looked at God Himself and said, "Domine, non sum dignus ..." Forgive me if I seem to find the past vastly more inspiring than our rather disappointing present.And so it begins - with no other outlet for my literary madness, I seriously had begun to worry. You will find many things on this forum, but an apology will never be one of them. Love me, hate me, or quit wasting my time. Enjoy the show.